Post by bjd on Apr 1, 2013 12:54:36 GMT

One of the things that I find interesting as well as difficult to understand is that the USA is a country made up of immigrants. Those descended from the few original immigrants who indeed felt the need to fight the indigenous populations are a small percentage of the present population.

Most Americans are more recent immigrants, fleeing war or poverty in countries all over the world, over the past century. A quick look at Wiki tells me the population has more than doubled since 1950, to the current 313,914,000 or so.

So nautiker's "historical background" doesn't really work -- lots of those people come from places where weapons were not easily obtained. There is not much dangerous wildlife any more.

So, how come it's so hard to get a majority of people to realize that easy access to weapons is not a good thing? And to get politicians, who are after all elected, to get their act together and stop allowing easy access to murderous arsenals, such as that of the young guy who killed the children in Newtown.

Hunters don't need semi-automatic weapons to hunt deer.

It would also prevent the huge flow of weapons into Mexico and Central America.

Post by on Apr 1, 2013 17:47:30 GMT

That has to do with the lobbyist in American politics and the NRA is very power full in that matter.

It also is the mind set of those pro gun people, I have a Facebook friend, ex soldier was stationed in Germany for some time, I had to block his comments I just couldn't stand it, there is no place for reasoning with these people, bad people always can get guns, you can kill a person with a pen or car, so do we put a ban on that too??

After the shooting at the movie theater was one guy saying that if every other person in there had a gun it wouldn't have happened, great a bunch of people start shooting at each other in the dark, my guess more people would have been killed, in their world guns would have saved lives.

My argument that Europe is a safer place because of fewer guns was met with 'Europe don't try to tell us what to do, we saved your butts in two WW's', I easier convince my wall of anything than that guy.

I guess I might ask him why he needs automatic or semi automatic guns for hunting, but then he will tell me he doesn't hunt but needs them for protection, just crazy.

Post by bixaorellana on Apr 9, 2013 15:04:06 GMT

I haven't been keeping up with this thread, but just read the previous page and this one.

Whereas I agree with Bjd about the obvious necessity for gun control, I disagree with saying that "Nautiker's historical background doesn't really work". nautiker's statement here, at #58

He describes a historical background that resulted in present day attitudes, just as Htmb's telling anecdotes reveal how guns have always been a part of US culture. Logical or not, things that are entrenched in a culture will always seem to make sense to a large portion of the public. As Htmb said,

Post by bjd on Apr 9, 2013 15:58:35 GMT

What I meant by saying it was a country of immigrants is that the majority of Americans today are not descended from people who were in the wild west, hunting buffalo or defending themselves. None of those crammed into ships landing at Ellis Island were coming from "wide open spaces" -- on the contrary, they came from crowded, European countries.

And we are not even speaking about Latino immigrants, Asians, blacks, etc. -- their background was not likely to be a gun-friendly one either. Don't they have any input into the situation?

Post by bixaorellana on Apr 10, 2013 4:37:31 GMT

Well, that's what I meant by present-day attitudes. It's part of the vision of America, right or wrong, accurate or not. It's what the immigrants were going to, don't fence me in & all that, plus as they assimilated they absorbed & accepted more & more of the prevalent culture.

Post by nautiker on Apr 21, 2013 10:13:45 GMT

so the momentum has indeed been wasted - wonder whether to some extent the incident in Boston played a role...

bjd and bixa, thanks for picking up my remark - I admit that this thesis likely wouldn't pass for a dissertation, I just wanted to point out that it's always easier to emancipate yourself from something you've never been 'addicted' to - and I fear that 'free' guns are soemthing you can get fond of very quickly...

Post by mossie on Apr 21, 2013 14:41:18 GMT

Watching the capture of the last Boston bomber, I was appalled at the lack of control by the police . There was a tremendous amount of firing and yet the suspect was only hit a few times, don't they teach the police to shoot straight

Post by htmb on Apr 22, 2013 0:17:52 GMT

From what I've heard about that event on television, this is what police and eyewitness civilians were saying last night:A) it was darkB) the police were taken by surprise and there was only a small group on the scene at firstC) each of the suspected bombers were in separate cars and were firing at policeD) one of the police officers (a transit officer) was seriously wounded in the gun battle (and, of course, one young officer had just been killed on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus).F) a pipe bomb and a couple of homemade grenades were thrown at policeG) the older brother got out of his car and approached police while firing. He was wrestled to the ground and police were attempting to handcuff him when the younger brother charged them with his vehicle. The police dove out of the way and were missed, but the younger man drove over his brother, dragging him twenty feet. This is what police believed killed the older brother (who was also wearing an explosive vest)

Post by mossie on Apr 22, 2013 7:35:49 GMT

My remarks were in reference to the final shoot out where the wounded suspect was holed up in a little boat in a back yard, a siege and a couple of stun grenades would have done the job. Softlee, softlee, catchee monkey.Now they have shot him through the throat and it seems unlikely that he will be able to explain his actions. Trigger happy as usual I'm afraid.

Post by mich64 on Apr 22, 2013 16:40:41 GMT

I was thinking that perhaps the younger brother drove over his brother hoping to trigger the bombs in his vest to perhaps die together.

They have reported today that they have been questioning the wife of the older brother. I am unsure if the apartment they keep referring to was their apartment or if the brothers lived there together and he was not living with his wife? The younger brother is also reported to be living on campus of the University?

Also reported, neither men had a gun license and of course the younger brother was not old enough to apply anyway.

Post by bjd on Apr 22, 2013 19:20:14 GMT

Meanwhile, wasn't there another shooting in Seattle?

Amazingly, McCain and other Republicans want the younger brother to be charged as an "enemy combattant"! He is 19, has lived in the States for 10 years, has US citizenship, and the victims were Americans on American soil.

Post by kerouac2 on May 2, 2013 19:05:48 GMT

When my brother and I walked along with our grandfather on his hunting days (which were more "nature walks" than actually hunting, even if we brought back a hare or two from time to time, sometimes a partridge), he would have never in a million years proposed that either of us carry a gun as well. We were just there as observers, and that was fine with me.

though it compiles data from more than a decade, the results are very devastating, especially once you start to zoom in and you see the individual cases behind the mere figures...

on another note: encountered to young boys (approx. 8 or 9yo I'd guess) at the playground yesterday, one with a plastic toy rifle, the other one with a plastic toy submachine gun - am I already guilty of double standards if I consider that one even more abhorrent than the first one?

Post by bixaorellana on Jul 4, 2013 22:51:12 GMT

The thing that gets me about "forgetting" that you're carrying a gun is that guns are heavy. It's not really the same thing as a smoker forgetting he has a lighter in his pocket.

One thing in the article that annoyed me was this phrase, with its implication that in the pure, liberal northeast there aren't as many yahoos with guns. It comes immediately after two paragraphs listing how many guns were found by airport security in other parts of the country.By contrast, at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York, where TSA screened nearly 27 million passengers last year, there was a single passenger found to have a gun.

Apparently the writer of this Associated Press article had not read some of the articles I've read, about how many forbidden and genuinely dangerous items get past those officious dweebs in government employ intrepid Transportation Security Administration screeners. Generally the items weren't even cleverly concealed -- it's simply that someone wasn't really doing the job.

Post by nautiker on Jul 15, 2013 20:36:32 GMT

would have thought the Zimmermann/Martin case would feature here, yet it's just quiet - everybody too jaded about it? if I recall correctly, there are several Florida residents on the board, would be curious to learn about their views.

Post by htmb on Jul 15, 2013 22:34:23 GMT

Since I suppose I'm the only full-time resident of the state of Florida who is active on this forum, I guess you are asking me? I will tell you my experience and thoughts:

For most of the trial, which was broadcast on television here, I was out of the country. I did not watch until the final night of jury deliberations, but other than watching the Watergate and Clinton hearings, and maybe a little bit of the OJ trial, I don't tend to focus on this type of an event. I turned on the news Saturday night, saw there might be a verdict soon, and watched all the way through the press conferences with the attorneys afterwards.

During the trial the news stations did not show the jurors on television. There were six women; one African American and five white. I believe there were also four alternate jurors, and several, if not all, of them were men. I believe two of the jurors had just moved to this state, so their knowledge of the event was limited. The jurors were known only by their number, and their names were never mentioned in the courtroom. Apparently in Florida, six jurors are used unless the defendant is charged with a first degree, death penalty level charge. Death penalty cases have 12 jurors. .

I do not know all the facts in the case. I did not hear any testimony. I have no opinion of the attorneys, nor do I know much about the victim or the defendant. I also do not know how the State's Attorney's office went about deciding the charges. The burden was on the prosecution to prove their charges. The jurors apparently didn't think the charges were warranted based on the evidence presented to them from both sides.

I do believe in our court system, and can only imagine that the jurors, who were sequestered during the trial and who did not see or hear the information playing out in the press, deliberated carefully. According to news reporters who were in the courtroom the jurors were very attentive during the trial and took lots of notes.

Obviously, I don't know what happened that night, nor do I have an opinion about who was right and who was wrong. I know a young man is dead, and the lives of members of two different families have been destroyed. It is a horrendous thing. I have seen mature adults make horrible mistakes, but I have also witnessed teenagers doing really dumb and dangerous things. I would hope that we have come far enough in this state to have moved away from racial profiling. Though it is bound to exist among some due to the nature of human choice, I do believe it is rare in my community. I have no idea what it's generally like in the Sanford area, which is over 100 miles to the south.

There will most likely be civil suits filed in the weeks and months to come. For sure, neither family will ever be the same. If anything good can come out of this tragedy, in my opinion, it will be a continuation of positive dialogue and relationship-building among people of different race and color. While I doubt it will have much effect on the legal ownership of guns, perhaps it will serve as a reminder of the complete and utter responsibility individuals have when it comes to gun safety.

Post by bixaorellana on Jul 15, 2013 22:49:51 GMT

Even though I abhor the whole "trial by media" thing which is so prevalent now, I did note certain things in what I've read about George Zimmerman. My interpretation is that he was spoiling for some kind of violence, but wanted it bracketed within the positive onus of protecting the public. The killing may not have had anything to do with racial profiling or motivation, but more that Zimmerman was on high alert all the time wanting drama & had a gun he was itching to use. He'd been a non-official security guard in the past & lost that job because of over-aggression. The "neighborhood watch" of which he was supposedly the leader may have only existed in his own head. And, as far as I know, official neighborhood watch volunteers do not carry guns.